This category needs an editor. We encourage you to help if you are qualified.
Volunteer, or read more about what this involves.
Related categories
Siblings:
61 found
Search inside:
(import / add options)   Sort by:
1 — 50 / 61
  1. Lennart Åqvist (2007). An Interpretation of Probability in the Law of Evidence Based on Pro-Et-Contra Argumentation. Artificial Intelligence and Law 15 (4):391-410.
    The purpose of this paper is to improve on the logical and measure-theoretic foundations for the notion of probability in the law of evidence, which were given in my contributions Åqvist [ (1990) Logical analysis of epistemic modality: an explication of the Bolding–Ekelöf degrees of evidential strength. In: Klami HT (ed) Rätt och Sanning (Law and Truth. A symposium on legal proof-theory in Uppsala May 1989). Iustus Förlag, Uppsala, pp 43–54; (1992) Towards a logical theory of legal evidence: semantic analysis (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  2. Jeremy Bentham (1825/1981). A Treatise on Judicial Evidence. F.B. Rothman.
    Explains every part of the theory of the law of evidence, including the nature and species of judicial proof, means of protection against falsehood, grounds of excluding proof, and peculiarities of certain species of evidence.
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  3. Floris Bex, Henry Prakken, Chris Reed & Douglas Walton (2003). Towards a Formal Account of Reasoning About Evidence: Argumentation Schemes and Generalisations. [REVIEW] Artificial Intelligence and Law 11 (2-3):125-165.
    This paper studies the modelling of legal reasoning about evidence within general theories of defeasible reasoning and argumentation. In particular, Wigmore's method for charting evidence and its use by modern legal evidence scholars is studied in order to give a formal underpinning in terms of logics for defeasible argumentation. Two notions turn out to be crucial, viz. argumentation schemes and empirical generalisations.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  4. Yuqian Bi (2010). Min Shi Su Song Zheng Ming Fang Ai Yan Jiu =. Beijing da Xue Chu Ban She.
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  5. Jingtian Chen (2012). Fa Guan Zheng Ju Ping Pan Yan Jiu =. Zhongguo Ren Min Gong an da Xue Chu Ban She.
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  6. Kuk Cho (2005). Wibŏp Sujip Chŭnggŏ Paeje Pŏpchʻik. Pagyŏngsa.
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  7. L. Jonathan Cohen (1977). The Probable and the Provable. Clarendon Press.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  8. Mirjan R. Damaška (1997). Evidence Law Adrift. Yale University Press.
    In this important book, a distinguished legal scholar examines how the legal culture and institutions in Anglo-American countries affect the way in which evidence is gathered, sifted, and presented to the courts.
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  9. Housheng Duan (2011). Zheng Ming Ping Jia Yuan Li: Jian Ji Dui Min Shi Su Song Fang Fa Lun de Tan Tao = the Theory of Proof Evaluation: With Some Study of the Civil Procedure Methodology. Fa Lü Chu Ban She.
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  10. Housheng Duan (2009). Zheng Ming Ping Jia Ying Xiang Yin Su Fen Xi =. Fa Lü Chu Ban She.
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  11. Shuchen Duan (2007). Zheng Ming Biao Zhun Wen Ti Yan Jiu. Ren Min Fa Yuan Chu Ban She.
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  12. Christoph Engel (2000). Psychological Research on Heuristics Meets the Law. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 23 (5):747-747.
    Heuristics make decisions not only fast and frugally, but often nearly as well as “full” rationality or even better. Using such heuristics should therefore meet health care standards under liability law. But an independent court often has little chance to verify the necessary information. And judgments based on heuristics might appear to have little legitimacy, given the widespread belief in formal rationality.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  13. Jorge Fábrega P. (2012). La Carga de la Prueba (Onus Probandi). Cultural Portobelo.
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  14. Jordi Ferrer Beltrán (ed.) (2006). Estudios Sobre la Prueba. Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México.
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  15. Joseph S. Fulda (2013). The Illiberal Fruits of Corruption. The St. Croix Review 46 (4):58-63.
    Article interrelating /de facto/ bribery, public corruption, the disconnect between private life and public life, the disconnect between logic, on the one hand, and politics and ethics, on the other, and the four rationales for the exclusionary rules (in law), using New York City as a case study.
    Remove from this list |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  16. Carlo Furno (2008). La Prueba Legal. Leyer.
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  17. Carlo Furno (2008). Verdad y Proceso. Leyer.
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  18. Peter Gärdenförs, Bengt Hansson, Nils-Eric Sahlin & Sören Halldén (eds.) (1983). Evidentiary Value: Philosophical, Judicial, and Psychological Aspects of a Theory: Essays Dedicated to Sören Halldén on His Sixtieth Birthday. C.W.K. Gleerups.
    Remove from this list |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  19. Simone Gittelson, Alex Biedermann, Silvia Bozza & Franco Taroni (2013). Modeling the Forensic Two-Trace Problem with Bayesian Networks. Artificial Intelligence and Law 21 (2):221-252.
    The forensic two-trace problem is a perplexing inference problem introduced by Evett (J Forensic Sci Soc 27:375–381, 1987). Different possible ways of wording the competing pair of propositions (i.e., one proposition advanced by the prosecution and one proposition advanced by the defence) led to different quantifications of the value of the evidence (Meester and Sjerps in Biometrics 59:727–732, 2003). Here, we re-examine this scenario with the aim of clarifying the interrelationships that exist between the different solutions, and in this way, (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  20. Thomas F. Gordon, Henry Prakken & Douglas N. Walton (2007). The Carneades Model of Argument and Burden of Proof. Artificial Intelligence 171 (10-15):875-896.
    We present a formal, mathematical model of argument structure and evaluation, taking seriously the procedural and dialogical aspects of argumentation. The model applies proof standards to determine the acceptability of statements on an issue-by-issue basis. The model uses different types of premises (ordinary premises, assumptions and exceptions) and information about the dialectical status of statements (stated, questioned, accepted or rejected) to allow the burden of proof to be allocated to the proponent or the respondent, as appropriate, for each premise separately. (...)
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  21. Christopher R. Green (2007). Suing One's Sense Faculties for Fraud: 'Justifiable Reliance' in the Law as a Clue to Epistemic Justification. Philosophical Papers 36 (1):49-90.
    The law requires that plaintiffs in fraud cases be 'justified' in relying on a misrepresentation. I deploy the accumulated intuitions of the law to defend externalist accounts of epistemic justification and knowledge against Laurence BonJour's counterexamples involving clairvoyance. I suggest that the law can offer a well-developed model for adding a no-defeater condition to either justification or knowledge but without requiring that subjects possess positive reasons to believe in the reliability of an epistemic source.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  22. Hua Guo (2009). An Jian Shi Shi Ren Ding Fang Fa =. Zhongguo Ren Min Gong an da Xue Chu Ban She.
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  23. Susan Haack (2012). The Embedded Epistemologist: Dispatches From the Legal Front. Ratio Juris 25 (2):206-235.
    In ordinary circumstances, we can assess the worth of evidence well enough without benefit of any theory; but when evidence is especially complex, ambiguous, or emotionally disturbing—as it often is in legal contexts—epistemological theory may be helpful. A legal fact-finder is asked to determine whether the proposition that the defendant is guilty, or is liable, is established to the required degree of proof by the [admissible] evidence presented; i.e., to make an epistemological appraisal. The foundherentist theory developed in Evidence and (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  24. Susan Haack (2008). Proving Causation: The Holism of Warrant and the Atomism of Daubert. Journal of Health and Biomedical Law 4:253-289.
    In many toxic-tort cases - notably in Oxendine v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc, and in Joiner v. G.E., - plaintiffs argue that the expert testimony they wish to present, though no part of it is sufficient by itself to establish causation "by a preponderance of the evidence," is jointly sufficient to meet this standard of proof; and defendants sometimes argue in response that it is a mistake to imagine that a collection of pieces of weak evidence can be any stronger (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  25. Jaap C. Hage, Ronald Leenes & Arno R. Lodder (1993). Hard Cases: A Procedural Approach. [REVIEW] Artificial Intelligence and Law 2 (2):113-167.
    Much work on legal knowledge systems treats legal reasoning as arguments that lead from a description of the law and the facts of a case, to the legal conclusion for the case. The reasoning steps of the inference engine parallel the logical steps by means of which the legal conclusion is derived from the factual and legal premises. In short, the relation between the input and the output of a legal inference engine is a logical one. The truth of the (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  26. H. L. Ho (2008). A Philosophy of Evidence Law: Justice in the Search for Truth. Oxford University Press.
    The dominant approach to evaluating the law on evidence and proof focuses on how the trial system should be structured to guard against error. This book argues instead that complex and intertwining moral and epistemic considerations come into view when departing from the standpoint of a detached observer and taking the perspective of the person responsible for making findings of fact. Ho contends that it is only by exploring the nature and content of deliberative responsibility that the role and purpose (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  27. Hendrik Kaptein (2008). Legal Evidence and Proof: Statistics, Stories, Logic. Ashgate.
    With special attention being paid to recent developments in Artificial Intelligence and the Law, specifically related to evidentiary reasoning, this book ...
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  28. Hannu Tapani Klami (2000). Law and Truth: A Theory of Evidence. Finnish Academy of Science and Letters.
    Remove from this list |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  29. Robert M. Krivoshey (ed.) (1994). Presentation of Evidence to Juries. Garland Pub..
    Remove from this list |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  30. Ming Li (2013). Zheng Ju Zheng Ming Li Yan Jiu =. Zhongguo Ren Min Gong an da Xue Chu Ban She.
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  31. Yuhua Li (2006). Si Fa Jian Ding de Su Song Hua. Zhongguo Ren Min Gong an da Xue Chu Ban She.
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  32. Yongan Liao (2009). Min Shi Zheng Ju Fa Xue de Ren Shi Lun Yu Jia Zhi Lun Ji Chu =. Zhongguo She Hui Ke Xue Chu Ban She.
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  33. Richard L. Lippke (2008). Larry Laudan, Truth, Error, and Criminal Law: An Essay in Legal Epistemology. Criminal Law and Philosophy 2 (1):85-89.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  34. David McCarthy (1996). Liability and Risk. Philosophy and Public Affairs 25 (3):238-262.
    Standard theories of liability say that X is liable to Y only if Y was harmed, only if X caused Y harm, and (usually) only if X was at fault. This article offers a series of criticisms of each of these claims, and use them to construct an alternative theory of liability in which the nature of X's having imposed a risk of harm on Y is central to the question of when X is liable to Y, and for how (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  35. Hadda Mebrouk (2012). Senetle Ispat Konusunda Fransız Hukukundaki Geliştirmeler, Türk Ve Cezayir Hukuk Ile Karşılaştırma. Yetkin.
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  36. Peter Murphy (ed.) (2003). Evidence, Proof, and Facts: A Book of Sources. New York ;Oxford University Press.
    This book is a collection of materials concerned not only with the law of evidence, but also with the logical and rhetorical aspects of proof; the epistemology of evidence as a basis for the proof of disputed facts; and scientific aspects of the subject. The editor also raises issues such as the philosophical basis for the use of evidence.
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  37. Thomas Nadelhoffer & Adam Feltz (2008). The Actor–Observer Bias and Moral Intuitions: Adding Fuel to Sinnott-Armstrong's Fire. Neuroethics 1 (2):133-144.
    In a series of recent papers, Walter Sinnott-Armstrong has used findings in social psychology to put pressure on the claim that our moral beliefs can be non-inferentially justified. More specifically, he has suggested that insofar as our moral intuitions are subject to what psychologists call framing effects, this poses a real problem for moral intuitionism. In this paper, we are going to try to add more fuel to the empirical fire that Sinnott-Armstrong has placed under the feet of the intuitionist. (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  38. Naylor, E., Wood, D. & J. Savulescu, Neuroscience, Neuroethics and the Law, Student British Medical Journal, February 2008.
    of (from Oxford Uehiro Centre for Practical Ethics).
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  39. Michael S. Pardo & Dennis Patterson (2011). More on the Conceptual and the Empirical: Misunderstandings, Clarifications, and Replies. [REVIEW] Neuroethics 4 (3):215-222.
    At the invitation of the Editors, we wrote an article (entitled, “Minds, Brains, and Norms”) detailing our views on a variety of claims by those arguing for the explanatory power of neuroscience in matters of law and ethics. The Editors invited comments on our article from four distinguished academics (Walter Glannon, Carl Craver, Sarah Robins, and Thomas Nadelhoffer) and invited our reply to their critique of our views. In this reply to our commentators, we correct some potential misunderstandings of our (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  40. Michael Pardo & Dennis Patterson (2011). Minds, Brains, and Norms. Neuroethics 4 (3):179-190.
    Arguments for the importance of neuroscience reach across many disciplines. Advocates of neuroscience have made wide-ranging claims for neuroscience in the realms of ethics, value, and law. In law, for example, many scholars have argued for an increased role for neuroscientific evidence in the assessment of criminal responsibility. In this article, we take up claims for the explanatory role of neuroscience in matters of morals and law. Drawing on our previous work together, we assess the cogency of neuroscientific explanations of (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  41. Dennis Patterson (2011). Minds, Brains, and Norms. Neuroethics 4 (3):179-190.
    Arguments for the importance of neuroscience reach across many disciplines. Advocates of neuroscience have made wide-ranging claims for neuroscience in the realms of ethics, value, and law. In law, for example, many scholars have argued for an increased role for neuroscientific evidence in the assessment of criminal responsibility. In this article, we take up claims for the explanatory role of neuroscience in matters of morals and law. Drawing on our previous work together, we assess the cogency of neuroscientific explanations of (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  42. Gamini Lakshman Peiris (1989). Recent Trends in the Commonwealth Law of Evidence. Sarvodaya Book Pub. Services.
    Remove from this list |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  43. Paul Roberts & Mike Redmayne (eds.) (2007). Innovations in Evidence and Proof: Integrating Theory, Research and Teaching. Hart.
    Remove from this list |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  44. Salvatore Ruggieri, Dino Pedreschi & Franco Turini (2010). Integrating Induction and Deduction for Finding Evidence of Discrimination. Artificial Intelligence and Law 18 (1):1-43.
    We present a reference model for finding (prima facie) evidence of discrimination in datasets of historical decision records in socially sensitive tasks, including access to credit, mortgage, insurance, labor market and other benefits. We formalize the process of direct and indirect discrimination discovery in a rule-based framework, by modelling protected-by-law groups, such as minorities or disadvantaged segments, and contexts where discrimination occurs. Classification rules, extracted from the historical records, allow for unveiling contexts of unlawful discrimination, where the degree of burden (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  45. Alex Stein (2005). Foundations of Evidence Law. Oxford University Press.
    This is the first book to systematically examine the underlying theory of evidence in Anglo-American legal systems. Stein develops a detailed and innovative theory which sets aside the traditional vision of evidence law as facilitating the discovery of the truth. Combining probability theory, epistemology, economic analysis, and moral philosophy, he argues instead that the fundamental purpose of evidence law is to apportion the risk of error in conditions of uncertainty.
    Remove from this list |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  46. Stephen J. Toope (2009). Internationalism and Global Norms for Neuroethics. American Journal of Bioethics 9 (1):1 – 2.
  47. Stacey A. Tovino (2008). The Impact of Neuroscience on Health Law. Neuroethics 1 (2):101-117.
    Advances in neuroscience have implications for criminal law as well as civil and regulatory law, including health, disability, and benefit law. The role of the behavioral and brain sciences in health insurance claims, the mental health parity debate, and disability proceedings is examined.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  48. William L. Twining (2006/1994). Rethinking Evidence: Exploratory Essays. Cambridge University Press.
    The Law of Evidence has traditionally been perceived as a dry, highly technical, and mysterious subject. This book argues that problems of evidence in law are closely related to the handling of evidence in other kinds of practical decision-making and other academic disciplines, that it is closely related to common sense and that it is an interesting, lively and accessible subject. These essays develop a readable, coherent historical and theoretical perspective about problems of proof, evidence, and inferential reasoning in law. (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  49. William L. Twining (1985). Theories of Evidence: Bentham and Wigmore. Stanford University Press.
    The Rationalist Tradition of evidence scholarship1 The history of the law of evidence is the history of a series of largely isolated responses to particular ...
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  50. William L. Twining (ed.) (1983). Facts in Law: Association for Legal and Social Philosophy, Ninth Annual Conference at Hatfield College, University of Durham, 2nd-4th April 1982. [REVIEW] Steiner.
    Remove from this list |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
1 — 50 / 61